World Championships and How They Were Secured 1915

This content is protected

http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/117549757/13119107

 

This content is protected

WORLD'S CHAMPlONSHIPS AND
HOW THEY WERE SECURED
Johnny Kilbane Rightful Owner of Feather Title
{No. IV.— CONCLUSION.)
As with all championships, the American people claimed many of their men as champions of the world in the featherweight division; but a close study of things reveal the fact that not until Ike 'Spider' Weir, who was recognised both in America and England as the
champion, met and was defeated by "Torpedo" Billy Murphy, of Australia, was the matter (for the first time) decided. After successfully defending his title against the best of the American boys, Billy returned to Australia, and on September 2, 1890, lost the title to the greatest of all glove fighters, Young Griffo, who, on July 22, of the following year, repeated the dose. Now. as the last-named never after made weight, did the title not really belong to Murphy ? and as he was knocked out by Johnny Griffin, of America, in 1893, the latter, I claim, was the next champion, had the battle not been limited to ten rounds. Therefore as George Dixon shortly alter defeated Murphy, the colored lad was, to my mind, the champion at that period. 1893. However, in '94, he put it beyond all doubt by accounting for Johnny Griffin. His 20, 25, and 10 rounds' draws with Griffo had no bearing whatever on the title, and if the great Australian had got what was coming to him
— a clean-cut victory on each occasion — it would not have mattered, as our representative was always overweight.
Dixon held the title until 1898, when Englishman Ben Jordan beat him on points in 25 rounds. He, in the following year, was beaten
by Ed. Santry, but on July 14, 1899, Dixon was once more champion, for on that date he accounted for Santry, but had to give way to that great American boxer, Terry McGovern. who beat him in eight rounds on May 9. 1900, and again on June 23 of that year in 6 rounds. Finding his weight increasing so rapidly that he was unable to make the 9st limit, after losing to Young Corbett, he and the latter entered the lightweight list, consequently once more did Dixon become champion featherweight, and after boxing a twenty-round draw with Abe Attell on October 20, 1901, Dixon lost in 15 rounds in their return match eight days later. After losing, then winning, from Tom Sullivan, Attell remained top of the heap until
1912, when the present holder, Johnny Kilbane, defeated him.
In conclusion, I would like to suggest that Mr. Baker import Kilbane for the purpose of giving our many clever featherweights a chance
for the world's title. It would give this particular division the filip it is now so badly in need of, inasmuch as our local fans are not partial to featherweights. Exceedingly bad taste, as these little fellows put more real fight into half a dozen rounds than those of any other division do in 20. Take the Jim Hill Sid Sullivan battle, for instance. Was a better or more exciting contest ever waged ?

http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/117549514/13119115#

 

This content is protected

http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/117551320/13119099

 

This content is protected

WORLD'S CHAMPIONSHIPS AND
HOW THEY WERE ATTAINED
Darcy Most Legitimate Middleweight
Since Fitzsimmons
Often we receive questions from correspondent, who confidently expect more attention than space will allow. For instance, during the week the following came to hand :
'Will you kindly publish the names of the world's champions in every division, from the very start ?— -FIGHT FAN,' Ashfield.'
Though impossible to give the answer in the ordinary way, through our Question Box, it gives me the idea of writing what I hope will
be found interesting by our many readers.
THE HEAVYWEIGHT TITLE.
Let us commence with the big fellows and work down. Everyone is aware that our American friends will still have it that because
John L. Sullivan proved the best of his land and beat Charlie Mitchell, the little English champion, he was champion of the world. This was not so, as he refused to meet our champion, Peter Jackson, using the color-line as his excuse. However, what of Goddard and Slavin ? Were they not white enough ? Still John L. strenuously refused. When at the 'had been' stage of his career,
Sullivan, after an absence from the game of over three years, and at the age of 34, was beaten by 26-year-old Jim Corbett, who subsequently accounted for Charlie Mitchell, for which the American people proclaimed James J. not only their champion, but also champion of the world. It was ever thus with our American cousins — their country is the world. Corbett, however, though not quite top of the tree, had gained such a position that, ere the very
summit could be reached. he would have had to account fur an Australian. I mean to say that, at that particular period,
there were three centres in the boxing world — England, America, and Australia, with the last named representatives well in the running in every division. Therefore, though Corbett had won the American title and defeated England's best, he had still the best Australian to account for before he could justify Claim the title of
world's champion. That is why I have always maintained that the Corbett-Fitzsimmons contest was the first for the heavyweight title.
Fitz lost to Jeffries, but, in the natural course of events, when the latter retired ex-champion Fitzsimmons once more became top of the heap. ? he lost the title to O'Brien, who in turn was beaten for it by Burns. Then from Burns to Johnson, and on to the present holder — Jess Willard.
FITZSIMMONS FIRST MIDDLEWEIGHT CHAMPION.
The same remarks apply to the middleweights. Jack Dempsey was regarded in England and America as the champion in this division, leaving poor little Australia once more out in the cold but Fitzsimmons quickly convinced them that we were a power to be reckoned with, for he easily beat Dempsey, and was, on that account also, the first middleweight champion.
Fitzsimmons was still Running strongly in 1897 — so strongly, in fact, that he was champion heavyweight, and could still do the middleweight limit— but, despite this, Kid McCoy and Tommy Ryan each laid claim to the middleweight prize. However, neither had the slightest right thereto, for Fitz still stood supreme. Stanley Ketchel! claimed the title in 1908, in which year he defeated Mike (Twin) Sullivan. Jim (Twin) Sullivan, Billy Papke. Hugo Kelly. and Joe Thomas, and was knocked out by Papke, while in a subsequent match he returned the compliment by knocking out Papke. He
continued defeating ail opposition in 1903, until in October of that year he was beaten by Jack Johnson for the heavyweight championship. In 1910 he boxed six-round 'no-decision' affairs with Frank Klaus and Sam Langford. and knocked out 'Porky' Flynn. Willie Lewis and Jim Smith before being fatally shot. There is no denying the lact that he was a great glove fighter, the best of his day, but strictly speaking.
KETCHEI.L WAS NOT CHAMPION
of the world, because he beat only the best of his own country, and never defeated representatives from England or Australia, or accounted for those who had. On the assumption, however, that Ketchell was champion, what was wrong with Papke being the next in order ? Was he not ex-champion ? Though not as capable as his
predecessor, did he not do something more convincing towards making his claim better than Ketchell's by beating the champion middle-weight in England under proper conditions ?
Undoubtedly Papke was, at least, as much champion as was Ketchell. and in his next contest at the limit he lost to Klaus; so if we are to recognise Ketchell's claim we must also include Papke and Klaus in the list. Klaus after boxing no decisions with McGoorty, Dillon and Chip (the latter knocking him out twice), retired from the game, and can really claim never to have been beaten for the title, for though Chip defeated him by the short-cut route, it cannot be said that he won the middleweight championship in doing so. 'No decision' — the very term itself is sufficient for what cannot be Iost cannot be won. Besides, the conditions, ten rounds limit, and probably any old weight, are hardly those under which a title would hinge. It would be just as absurd to claim Woorak to be our champion racehorse because he proved the best at a mile.
However, in their usual "go as you please" government of matters pugilistic, the American authorities allowed Chip to be regarded as the world's middleweight champion. Yet they laugh at the idea of Al McCoy now occupying that position. The latter knocked Chip out in a no-decision bout. therefore if McCoy had no claim, neither had Chip.
THE POSITION SUMMARISED
Now, as it is my opinion that is being asked, I will give it by stating that neither of the last two mentioned had a claim, and I think
the following summing up of the situation will prove that our own Les Darcy is really the most legitimate champion since Bob Fitzsimmons time. Mr. Tom Andrews, editor of "The Milwaukee Leader," and regarded in America as the leading specialist in matters concerning records, published the fact that Jimmy Cabby's showing during 1914 was such as to entitle him to share the honor with Jeff Smith of champion middleweight. In other words, the title belonged to the winner cf that pair. Very well. Mr. R. L. Baker. of the same opinion, brought them together, and Smith won, in turn, he lost to Darcy. and yet we are frequently told that Darcy is not champion until he has defeated Mike Gibbons.
In view of the fact that Darcy his won his position in the pugilistic world by defeating his opponents over the championship course,
twenty rounds, whilst Gibbons is a 'no-decision' s****per, who. during the whole of his career has never boxed a twenty-round battle, would it not be fairer and more to the point to say that Mike Gibbons is not champion until he defeats Darcy ? I will have to make this much suffice for this issue and will continue the story of the welter, light, feather, and bantam weight divisions next
Saturday.
http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/117552529/13119091#

 

No but he says the English recognised Dempsey..... Fitz went to America with little or no reputation as far as I know. Yes it seems he stopped fighting middleweights but is he still technically the world champ ay MW ? I am not sure at this stage... The writers whole point to these articles is that world champions should beat more than the best of their own country to win world titles... you gotta admit the early days these titles had murky beginnings. He does not even till the time of writing recognise a single welterweight as ever being a true world champion... he does not say these guys are not great fighters... but he is right that there were American champions and Australian and British champions and that they should at least fight each other... He writes that Freddie Welsh is at least in his mind the very first true world lightweight champ as opposed to titles that were only ever fought between Americans beforehand and he has a point.

 

I think he means recognition comes from beating international competition.... The way I see what he is saying is that to ESTABLISH a world title we should start with the best of America and England and Australia (back this early on)... So it's not until Freddie Welsh from Britain is fought that finally the LW title is a legit WORLD title.... he seems right that before that only US based fighters had the belt.

He state Fitz was still under MW limit when he beat Corbett and therefore the MW title which he legitimized lost the linear nature so needed to be re-established. I agree with him in some things for dure... you can't just claim your belt and if you do go fight the best on the other continents... Put it this was.. turn the tables and have a belt only fought over between Aussies... would we expect the Americans to recognise such a title ??